It was a very good move, but it's hard to say whether it was the most prudent move.
The important thing was to ask whether you were abiding by the processes already in place and, if not, which processes you thought that you couldn't abide by. The issue was whether there was any appearance of potential conflicts of interest. The other important thing was to seek the opinion of Mr. Dion or his team members. This was indeed a precautionary approach, but it was based on a risk assessment.
You said earlier that some issues were expected to arise. It always depends on our risk sensitivity. We generally determine what risks are tolerable, what risks we think are a little high, and what risks we don't want to take at all. When the government contacted the Auditor General, was it based on risks considered too high or on normal risks? That would be the question to ask. To answer your question properly, we would need to know the level of risk considered.